Match This for Stupidity: Taxing a House of Cards

[Stingo]

Sin taxes are a favorite of legislators, and right now legislators of both stripes are looking very hard for more tax revenue. But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that a tax on tobacco and fatty food and liquor is going to make anyone healthier. That is neither the aim nor the result.

http://allspinzone.com/wp/2009/01/29/match-this-for-stupidity-taxing-a-house-of-cards/

[DJ13]

1. K&R

The height of this stupidity is the latest proposal to base the childrens health initiative (SCHIP) on an additional .61 per pack tax on cigarettes.

What happens to that health care if the tax is high enough (on top of the existing high taxes) to push people to quit?

[Stingo]

2. In the long run

it will lower healthcare costs, at the expense of certain freedoms, assuredly, but still.

[DJ13]

3. So would keeping us tied down in bed with diapers

But thats not living.

[Stingo]

13. Vitter might like it, though

[FiveGoodMen]

4. May lower the costs, but I doubt it will lower the price.

[ejpoeta]

5. like patterson's idea.... what's being called a fat tax.

wtf!! where does that end. right now it is on non diet pop. well, why stop there!! might as well tax potato chips and ice cream and everything else in the grocery aisle anyone deems unhealthy. I agree that this is just to raise money, it is not to stem unhealthy eating. the same is true for raising the taxes on cigarettes to prevent kids from smoking them. um, kids are the only ones with disposable income!! puleez! IT's amazing to me how patterson intends to raise money. taxing haircuts. is that supposed to be a luxury? because most people need to look presentable to go to a job. it's insane!!

[razors edge]

6. I support all those taxes.

Because as a smoker, I am tired of being singled out for financial attack.

What did the dogooders think these legions of lawyers were going to do after they got the smokers, retire?

When those who support targeting sinners get shot with their own guns, then we'll see how much they still support that tactic.

[Stingo]

7. It isn't really the lawyers

Not that it is all right or anything, but it isn't really the lawyers.

[razors edge]

9. Maybe not them exclusively,

but they seem to always end up with about a third of all these suits that demonize the companies, rightly or wrongly, and that opens the door to more government intervention that almost always goes toward the consumer.

[Stingo]

11. They end up bringing 100% of the suits

not one third. It is what they are paid to do, represent clients, whether plaintiffs or defendents.

[razors edge]

12. Meant to say

One third of the proceeds.

Sorry for the confusion.

[ejpoeta]

8. i hear you. it is so unfair to single out smokers. but it's easy.

you aren't allowed to stand up for smokers rights or you get ridiculed. i too knew that once they did it to smokers, then they would move on to something else. people won't be too happy with this one, though. but it is fair. not that folks will see it that way. and you are right.... the worm it sure does turn, doesn't it.

[razors edge]

10. Just pointing out that

your grandparents smoked like chimneys and died of old age can get you labeled some type of denier, its easier to just pay the damn tax and shut up.

Of course that is precisely the way it was planned.

Watch what you ask for, you just might get it.